…
While arrests of file-sharers and those running sites that closely facilitate infringement are nothing new, this week’s arrests appear to go way beyond anything seen before. The two men are not connected to the development of Popcorn Time and have not been offering copyrighted content for download.

Both sites were information resources, offering recent news on Popcorn Time related developments, guides, FAQ sections and tips on how to use the software.

…

Both men stand accused of distributing knowledge and guides on how to obtain illegal content online and are reported to have confessed.
…

I wonder what “confessed” means under these circumstances? Confessed to providing up-to-date and useful information on Popcorn Time? That’s hardly a crime by any stretch of the imagination.

but that’s no excuse to get overly inventive with regard to intellectual property crimes.

Before I forget:

Those looking for a clearer (and live) idea of what the site looked like before it was taken down should check out getpopcorntime.co.uk, which was previously promoted by PopcornTime.dk as an English language version of their site.

Whenever you encounter banned sites or information, be sure to pass the banned information along.

Censorship has no legitimate role on the Internet. If you don’t want to see particular content, don’t look. What other people choose to look at is their business and none of yours.

Child porn is the oft-cited example for censorship on the Internet. I agree it is evil, etc., but why concentrate on people sharing child porn? Shouldn’t the police be seeking the people making child porn?

Makes you wonder doesn’t it? Are the police ineffectually swatting (sorry) at the distribution of child porn and ignoring the real crimes of making child porn?

With modern day image recognition, you have to wonder why the police aren’t identifying more children in child porn? Or are they so wedded to ineffectual but budget supporting techniques that they haven’t considered the alternatives?

I am far more sympathetic to the use of technology to catch the producers of child porn than to state functionaries attempting to suppress the free interchange of information on the Internet.

This entry was posted
on Monday, August 24th, 2015 at 10:33 am and is filed under Censorship.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.